Nicely sarcastic. Though, ridiculous, of course. Dog re-gifting? You seriously side with the shelter? Maybe I'm a simple farmer, but it seems to me that if you assume a shelter is trying to help as many needy animals as possible and you assume that the hair dresser didn't have plans to fry Iggy up and serve him with a mess of greens -- would the time, money, and effort have been better spent rescuing an abused, abandoned, or otherwise needy animal? No. You're right. It's much better for all to make a huge issue out of Ellen's oversight and drum up sympathy from people like the author -- publicity and funds. Yes, how noble are we to slur Ellen to make a buck than to do the intelligent, rational thing and say "A new family for Iggy? Okay." Afterall, who is in charge of Mutts and Moms? Someone VASTLY more qualified to place a pet with a family than Ellen is? I doubt it. So, you imply that she doesn't love animals? As evidenced by her assuming that placing a needy dog in a loving home is an acceptable activity for someone other than a Shelter or Rescue Director?
But, you're right, of course. It would have been much better for Iggy to stay in the amazing shelter and get all that tender love and attention that they who are more interested in publicity than helping animals could provide. And, it does seem suspicious that Ellen would suddenly seem to care about animals. Afterall, she didn't care when she adopted Iggy. And she didn't care to try and help poor Iggy find a more accommodating home when hers didn't work out.
Or, maybe, like the shelter, you'd rather play on the situation to get 1/1000th of the notoriety that Ellen has by implying that she doesn't care for animals and that any action she takes is evidence thereof either because it's not directly helping animals or because it is (but only to prove that she doesn't dislike animals.) That kinda limits her options, doesn't it? Congratulations on your extra 20 page-visits today thanks to Ellen's popularity and notoriety.
Nicely sarcastic. Though, ridiculous, of course. Dog re-gifting? You seriously side with the shelter? Maybe I'm a simple farmer, but it seems to me that if you assume a shelter is trying to help as many needy animals as possible and you assume that the hair dresser didn't have plans to fry Iggy up and serve him with a mess of greens -- would the time, money, and effort have been better spent rescuing an abused, abandoned, or otherwise needy animal? No. You're right. It's much better for all to make a huge issue out of Ellen's oversight and drum up sympathy from people like the author -- publicity and funds. Yes, how noble are we to slur Ellen to make a buck than to do the intelligent, rational thing and say "A new family for Iggy? Okay." Afterall, who is in charge of Mutts and Moms? Someone VASTLY more qualified to place a pet with a family than Ellen is? I doubt it. So, you imply that she doesn't love animals? As evidenced by her assuming that placing a needy dog in a loving home is an acceptable activity for someone other than a Shelter or Rescue Director?
But, you're right, of course. It would have been much better for Iggy to stay in the amazing shelter and get all that tender love and attention that they who are more interested in publicity than helping animals could provide. And, it does seem suspicious that Ellen would suddenly seem to care about animals. Afterall, she didn't care when she adopted Iggy. And she didn't care to try and help poor Iggy find a more accommodating home when hers didn't work out.
Or, maybe, like the shelter, you'd rather play on the situation to get 1/1000th of the notoriety that Ellen has by implying that she doesn't care for animals and that any action she takes is evidence thereof either because it's not directly helping animals or because it is (but only to prove that she doesn't dislike animals.) That kinda limits her options, doesn't it? Congratulations on your extra 20 page-visits today thanks to Ellen's popularity and notoriety.